The Catholic Right, Part Fifty-eight
One of the things I have stressed in my series on the Catholic Right is that we have got to understand natural law in order to understand the Catholic Right and increasingly allied conservative Evangelicals. That being the case, I think any reasonable understanding of the wider Religious Right is incomplete without it.

Neoconservatives are tiny in number, yet large in influence due to their prolific writing, thinking, and support from wealthy patrons that locate them close to the corridors of power. It is a small movement of intellectuals that emerged in earnest opposing political trends of the 1960s, without a mass base and with only the power of their ideas and connections to win influence. Their vigorous defense of the free market, capitalism, and a militarist foreign policy wins them powerful allies. Yet other currents run through their thought, including a defense of natural law and the championing of religion.

"Natural law," meaning the rules God set into motion in the world and also instilled in our own natures, has been a central, animating philosophical idea in Christian thought for a thousand years. However it has taken some important turns along the way, and there are now what we might call several branches of thought about the definition of natural law.

One of these, the Classic view, is embraced and promoted by the leading thinkers of Catholic neoconservatives in the United States and their political allies in conservative Protestant evangelicalism. Roman Catholicism as a whole employs natural law principles as a means to rationally explain and interpret the morality of Scripture. However, many in the Vatican have recently pressed to superimpose their particular interpretations on the greater secular society. This is driven by the belief that natural law principles are so universal that even non-Catholics are subject to their tenets.

And as I discuss throughout the piece, reactionary Catholics such as George Weigel, Richard John Neuhaus and Robert P. George also frame many of their ethical arguments within a revisionist frame of America's Founders being proto-orthodox Catholics -- although that was clearly was not the case.
As I say in the article:

Nevertheless, Catholic neoconservatives such as Richard John Neuhaus, George Weigel and Michael Novak have seized on this erroneous view of natural law like a cudgel to further a revisionist narrative of American history that supports Religious Right notions of Christian nationalism. To this end, Thomas Jefferson and other of the founders are often portrayed as fervent evangelicals who cited thirteenth century interpretations of Aristotle's teachings; an inaccurate accounting that belies Jefferson's (among others) Arian Unitarianism (a belief in God as a single person as opposed to being three persons in one, a Trinity). "When they [the Founders] are not being denounced as infidels," historian Garry Wills bemusedly wrote, "men like Michael Novak dress them up as crypto-Evangelicals, crypto- Jews, or crypto-Catholics."

I will grant that this isn't exactly light reading. But, as Fred Clarkson has repeatedly said, the more you know about your opponents the more effectively you can engage them. Hopefully, the article will be worth the wading and help us all better refute the arguments often made by Catholic Right neocons and their allies.

One lesson I hope readers take away from the article is the need to read the Classical authors.

If we understand what Plato, Aristotle and Cicero were really saying then it becomes more difficult for demagogues such as Robert P. George, Eric Cohen and George Weigel to twist their words into right-wing balderdash.

Eeek! Jefferson was a Socinian, not an Arian Unitarian! Socinians were even more liberal that Arians. Socinians believed Jesus was human, not divine at all (but perhaps on a divine mission). Arians believed Jesus was a divine being created by but subordinate to the Father like a super-angel, who would be second in power in the universe under God the Father.

My exposure to Plato was in a class on political economy in college. We also read Machiavelli, Locke, Rousseau, and Marx to get some understanding of their respective political philosophies. It seems to me the current Catholic neo-orthodox folks borrow a lot from Plato (as do the Straussians,) from Aristotle, and ultimately from St. Thomas Aquinas.

They also share one characteristic with the people who gravitate away from the religious beliefs they were raised in, and that is a discontent with the world as it exists.

It's not a surprise to me the current holders of economic and political power would gravitate toward political and economic philosophies that would enable them to maintain their hold on power. The developments of the Baptist Presbyterian, and Methodist churches in the south on relying on a personal relation with Jesus and their use of Scripture to justify slaveholding were examples of this

it is useful to understand the general outlines of the religious and political beliefs of past societies. I differ from the traditionalists in believing that all students should have this education, not merely the elite, and that one must also study those who are not included or opt out of the dominant belief system of the day.

(I have had what amounts to a Great Books education / self-education, aeons ago.)

Respect for Others? or Political Correctness? The term "political correctness" as used by Conservatives and Republicans has often puzzled me: what exactly do they mean by it? After reading Chip Berlin's piece here-- http://www.talk2action.org/story/2016/7/21/04356/9417 I thought about what he explained......MTOLincoln(6 comments)

Fear What I'm feeling now is fear. I swear that it seems my nightmares are coming true with this new "president". I'm also frustrated because so many people are not connecting all the dots! I've......ArchaeoBob(6 comments)

"America - love it or LEAVE!" I've been hearing that and similar sentiments fairly frequently in the last few days - far FAR more often than ever before. Hearing about "consequences for burning the flag (actions) from Trump is chilling!......ArchaeoBob(8 comments)

"Faked!" Meme Keep your eyes and ears open for a possible move to try to discredit the people openly opposing Trump and the bigots, especially people who have experienced terrorism from the "Right" (Christian Terrorism is......ArchaeoBob(8 comments)

See if you recognize names on this list This comes from the local newspaper, which was conservative before and took a hard right turn after it was sold. Hint: Sarah Palin's name is on it! (It's also connected to Trump.) ......ArchaeoBob(3 comments)

Unions: A Labor Day Discussion This is a revision of an article which I posted on my personal board and also on Dailykos. I had an interesting discussion on a discussion board concerning Unions. I tried to piece it......Xulon(5 comments)

Capitalism and the Attack on the Imago Dei I joined this site today, having been linked here by Crooksandliars' Blog Roundup. I thought I'd put up something I put up previously on my Wordpress blog and also at the DailyKos. As will......Xulon(4 comments)

Alternate economy medical treatment Dogemperor wrote several times about the alternate economy structure that dominionists have built. Well, it's actually made the news. Pretty good article, although it doesn't get into how bad people could be (have been)......ArchaeoBob(6 comments)

Evidence violence is more common than believed Think I've been making things up about experiencing Christian Terrorism or exaggerating, or that it was an isolated incident? I suggest you read this article (linked below in body), which is about our great......ArchaeoBob(8 comments)

Demon Mammon? An anthropologist from outer space might be forgiven for concluding that the god of this world is Mammon. (Or, rather, The Market, as depicted by John McMurtry in his book The Cancer Stage of......daerie(2 comments)